Speaking Of Human Rights...
Of course, here in Canada our governing party is using the cloak of "religious freedom" to test public opinion regarding a law "that would provide protection to officials and churches who refuse to perform same-sex marriages." The Globe and Mail reported that Bloc Québécois MP Réal Ménard, who is gay, accused the government during Question Period of attempting to "legalize discrimination. Does the Minister of Justice realize that under the pretext of protecting freedom of religion and freedom of expression, liberties that are already protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, what he's proposing is to authorize religious groups to discriminate without worry?"
The Chronicle Hearald in Halifax breaks down the issue and states it in plain English, so here's hoping its message sinks in.
IF THE FEDERAL government is planning an unnecessary Defence of Religions Act to shield opponents of same-sex marriage, then its first line of defence – admitting it – has been pretty feeble.
On Wednesday, Justice Minister Vic Toews dismissed as "speculation" attempts by Opposition MPs to determine if his department is considering legislation to allow provincial civil marriage commissioners to refuse to marry same-sex couples and to protect anyone who, on religious grounds, criticizes homosexuality or refuses to do business with gay-rights groups....
Prime Minister Stephen Harper told Opposition Leader Bill Graham "the government has not any plans at all along the lines that he’s suggesting."
But...Mr. Harper and Mr. Toews should clear up the facts and tell us whether officials are examining the measures cited in The Globe’s report. And if so, why on Earth are they playing to a false impression that freedom of religious speech and practice are not already adequately safeguarded?
Freedom of religion should be defended in Canada – including the freedom of Canadians to disapprove of homosexuality if that’s their religious or moral belief and to express this disapproval in public.
But religious freedom can’t be carte blanche to say anything about gays. It can’t include a right to incite hatred or violence against them. If it could, then Osama bin Laden must have the right, as well, to continue to call for the killing of those who offend his fanatical religious views. Canadian soldiers have died in Afghanistan defending people against this aggression in the name of religion. We should not open the door to it at home.
No Canadian religious leaders we know of are calling for this extreme freedom. But the right to disapprove and criticize and quote sacred texts that some are concerned about is now protected.
Provincial employees who perform civil marriages don’t have a right to refuse to marry gay couples, or anyone else, because of their own beliefs. And so it should be. This is a civil, not a religious service. And imagine the chaos and unfairness if individual public servants could generally decide, based on their religion, who is entitled to get a public service. Ottawa has no authority to interfere with this provincial matter and the idea of introducing personal discrimination into public services is repugnant and irresponsible.
People should read the Conservative Party's founding principles. Belief in things like "progressive social policy, the equality of all Canadians and the freedom of the individual, including freedom of speech, worship and assembly" makes for some fun* if at times self-contradictory* reading.
*[Don't forget the fact that a self-confessed creationist is our Minister of Public Safety. I hope he's got his "Jesus is back -- it's the Rapture!!" emergency plan in place, because the way the world is going it can't be be far off now.]
The Chronicle Hearald in Halifax breaks down the issue and states it in plain English, so here's hoping its message sinks in.
IF THE FEDERAL government is planning an unnecessary Defence of Religions Act to shield opponents of same-sex marriage, then its first line of defence – admitting it – has been pretty feeble.
On Wednesday, Justice Minister Vic Toews dismissed as "speculation" attempts by Opposition MPs to determine if his department is considering legislation to allow provincial civil marriage commissioners to refuse to marry same-sex couples and to protect anyone who, on religious grounds, criticizes homosexuality or refuses to do business with gay-rights groups....
Prime Minister Stephen Harper told Opposition Leader Bill Graham "the government has not any plans at all along the lines that he’s suggesting."
But...Mr. Harper and Mr. Toews should clear up the facts and tell us whether officials are examining the measures cited in The Globe’s report. And if so, why on Earth are they playing to a false impression that freedom of religious speech and practice are not already adequately safeguarded?
Freedom of religion should be defended in Canada – including the freedom of Canadians to disapprove of homosexuality if that’s their religious or moral belief and to express this disapproval in public.
But religious freedom can’t be carte blanche to say anything about gays. It can’t include a right to incite hatred or violence against them. If it could, then Osama bin Laden must have the right, as well, to continue to call for the killing of those who offend his fanatical religious views. Canadian soldiers have died in Afghanistan defending people against this aggression in the name of religion. We should not open the door to it at home.
No Canadian religious leaders we know of are calling for this extreme freedom. But the right to disapprove and criticize and quote sacred texts that some are concerned about is now protected.
Provincial employees who perform civil marriages don’t have a right to refuse to marry gay couples, or anyone else, because of their own beliefs. And so it should be. This is a civil, not a religious service. And imagine the chaos and unfairness if individual public servants could generally decide, based on their religion, who is entitled to get a public service. Ottawa has no authority to interfere with this provincial matter and the idea of introducing personal discrimination into public services is repugnant and irresponsible.
People should read the Conservative Party's founding principles. Belief in things like "progressive social policy, the equality of all Canadians and the freedom of the individual, including freedom of speech, worship and assembly" makes for some fun* if at times self-contradictory* reading.
*[Don't forget the fact that a self-confessed creationist is our Minister of Public Safety. I hope he's got his "Jesus is back -- it's the Rapture!!" emergency plan in place, because the way the world is going it can't be be far off now.]
posted by jp at 12:30
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home